Dual HRA is impermissible when an employee’s spouse draws HRA from another organization at the same location.

The applicant, an employee of the Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), was transferred from Bhilai Steel Plant to IISCO Steel Plant, Burnpur, in November 2014.

At his request, he retained his company accommodation at Bhilai until 15 November 2017 and received HRA at the Bhilai rate while posted at Burnpur.

His wife, employed as an Assistant Professor at a college in Bhilai, also received HRA from her employer.

In June 2018, SAIL deducted ₹2,11,555 from the applicant’s dues, stating that the deduction represented HRA received by his wife and was required under the company’s HRA circular.

The applicant challenged the recovery, asserting that he had disclosed his wife’s employment and HRA and that the deduction was unlawful.

The Tribunal dismissed the application.

1. Whether SAIL could recover from the applicant the amount of HRA received by his wife while he was also receiving HRA from SAIL.

2. Whether the recovery of ₹2,11,555 from the applicant’s dues was in accordance with the applicable SAIL HRA rules.

The Tribunal applied SAIL Circular No. PER/ESS/4087 dated 19 January 2016.

Under paragraph (a), where both spouses are employed by SAIL and posted at the same location, only one is entitled to HRA. Under paragraph (b), where one spouse is employed by SAIL and the other by the Government, a public-sector entity, or any other organisation, HRA is payable to the SAIL employee only if the other spouse is not drawing HRA from their employer.

No statute or judicial precedent was cited.

The applicant and his wife were both receiving HRA while stationed at Bhilai, and the applicant continued to receive HRA from SAIL after his transfer to Burnpur while retaining the Bhilai accommodation.

The Tribunal held that the circular’s reference to “any other organization” covered the wife’s employer and prohibited the simultaneous receipt of HRA by both spouses in these circumstances.

It therefore found that SAIL’s recovery of the amount attributable to the wife’s HRA complied with the company rules.

It dismissed O.A. No. 1052 of 2019, disposed of the associated miscellaneous applications, and made no order as to costs.